Those of you who know me even moderately well know that I am a very strong advocate of breastfeeding. I’ve nursed both my children, and I’ve done so at any time and in any place that they needed to be fed. It is my right, and the right of my children, that I be able to do so.
Via comes the news that LJ has disallowed a woman from having a primary icon that shows her breastfeeding her child.
Another user, , has posted some of her correspondence with LJ about this matter, and she does so beautifully. What strikes me the most about what LJ has said are these sentences:
We fully support our users’ right to make their own decisions regarding parenting choices and styles, and we appreciate the dedication of parents who have chosen to participate in breastfeeding activism and education. We ask only that you are willing to extend the same support and appreciation to, for instance, parents who choose to believe that it is inappropriate for their children to view unsolicited nudity in public.
You see, the problem with that is that for a breastfeeding mom to offer that “support” to those parents who are offended by public breastfeeding, by default she must not nurse her baby in public. You cannot latch a new infant on properly without being able to see your nipple. Believe me, I’ve tried. You cannot put the baby under a blanket and make sure it’s latched on right. If you do use a blanket after you have the baby latched on, you draw the disapproving stares of all the people to whom you’re advertising what you’re doing and are offended by it.
It’s not a sexual act, people! I’m getting so sick of this bullshit.
I can’t tell if you’re interested in a serious discussion or not.
I wouldn’t know about pole dancing, as I don’t frequent those establishments like you apparently do. When I go to a restaurant, I go to kosher restaurants. Now I learn that here in Illinois, there’s a law that states that a women can bare her breasts to feed a baby in the restaurant, which is a violation of the religious convictions of the patrons of that restaurant, and as far as I can tell tthose women cannot be asked to desist or leave by the restaurant owners.
If you don’t find that circumstance disturbing, fine. However, I find that level of government intrusion into the workings of business and into the culture of a community to be very disturbing. It’s one thing to use raw political power to decriminalize baring one’s breasts in public; we live in a democracy, and you win some and you lose some. It’s another thing entirely to use raw political power to impose norms of culture on others, and that ought to make you very nervous. Unless, of course, you’re willing to accept a swing in the other direction, and it would be fine with you if all women had to wear veils in public, or no clothes at all, depending on the whims of the changing composition of the state legislature.
the right to strip naked and perform personal bodily functions
you have no idea how hard I laughed at this.
you poor squeamish little feller. good heavens. “personal bodily functions”? That’s so funny and so sad. it sounds like you’re talking about dropping the laundry at “21” and squatting over the dessert course.
it makes me wonder if you’d be just as nancy-kneed over dropping the laundry at 21 and merely EATING the dessert course. because you know. eating’s a personal bodily function, since nobody else can do it for you. or does “personal bodily function” only apply to icky girl-cootie laden bodily functions like menstruation or breastfeeding?